Air Superority Fighters

a Mustangs a P-51 not a P-50

Sheo Darren wrote:I see... it's been years since I read the material. From what I remembered, an American (for some odd reason my brain keeps on suggesting it was Charles Lindbergh -_-) succeeded in sneaking out blueprints, but bureaucratic paperwork soon consigned the information to the most secluded spot in the archives section.

Well, Lindbergh was too busy being a Nazi sympathizer. He was, despite all the denial that's been thrown around. Only reason he agreed to join combat operations as a Lightning pilot later in the war was that he liked flying too much.

Sheo Darren wrote:Now, Japanese soldiers eating people... I had thought that only happened when they were stuck in the jungle, hungry and with no food.

Oh, it happened quite often in non-starvation situations, I assure you. The poor men who ended up on the dinner table were more often than not downed Allied aircrew.

Sheo Darren wrote:Still, no one can match that Stuka pilot who sank a Russkie battleship with his cannon. ^_^

Hans Ulrich-Rudel! The living legend! The only man to receive the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oakleaves, Swords and Diamonds! That guy ruled so hard - honestly speaking, I look up to him more than any fighter ace.

Well, Lindbergh was too busy being a Nazi sympathizer. He was, despite
all the denial that's been thrown around. Only reason he agreed to join
combat operations as a Lightning pilot later in the war was that he
liked flying too much.

Well, that's an irony, if there ever was any. ^_^

Oh, it happened quite often in non-starvation situations, I assure you.
The poor men who ended up on the dinner table were more often than not
downed Allied aircrew.

At least those who weren't rescued by heroic islanders and coast watchers. It pays to be GI Joe.

Hans Ulrich-Rudel! The living legend! The only man to receive the
Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oakleaves, Swords and Diamonds!
That guy ruled so hard - honestly speaking, I look up to him more than any fighter ace.

Aye, he's the man. Like the A-10 pilots' joke went, "You can shoot down a hundred MiGs a day, but if you land at your airfield and find the Soviet Tanks Guard commander having a drink at your bar, you've lost the war."

Nachtsider wrote:

Sheo Darren wrote:I see... it's been years since I read the material. From what I remembered, an American (for some odd reason my brain keeps on suggesting it was Charles Lindbergh -_-) succeeded in sneaking out blueprints, but bureaucratic paperwork soon consigned the information to the most secluded spot in the archives section.

Well, Lindbergh was too busy being a Nazi sympathizer. He was, despite all the denial that's been thrown around. Only reason he agreed to join combat operations as a Lightning pilot later in the war was that he liked flying too much.

Actually, Lindbergh was considered too valueable as a national hero to be sent off to war. But he was allowed to be an air-army consultant/instructor for those Pacific Theater Pilots flying long missions! Since he flew to the Pacific Islands, where there the USA Ary Air Corp and US Navay Air Corp patrolled, they thought he would be safe. Instead, he flight troop was attacked many times, and he himself shotdown (though in despite) from 3 to 8 enemy Zeros in self defense; making him at least an ace. He is the only civil-ace known to history, though the US Army Air Corp frowned upon this and kept all this activity secret. Because it was secret, he was never awarded for his actions. During the war, he flew lightnings, mustangs, and the big bombers.

Lindbergh's second (actually first) contribution to the war (and all future aircraft since) was design premise and prinicipal that help create the DC-3. "The aircraft must be able to fly while fully loaded with 1/2 its engines off!" All multi-engined planes prototypes submitted to the US Military were personally flown by him personally to see it if passed his simple test. The DC-3 was the first plane to pass this test. Ford submitted a plane to revive its aircraft componant of its company. It failed, and this Ford never built another plane after that.

The test was simple: go upto 5000ft, shut off an engine. If it continued to fly level, it passed the test. If it starts to pitch down and descend, it fails.

I think you're a tad off about Lindbergh's combat records, Elfen. The guy never shot down any Zeros and never made ace - he downed at most a couple of bandits, one of them a recon plane and the other an Army fighter.

Sheo Darren wrote:The sad thing is that someone (forgot who) turned blueprints of the Zero over to the US before WWII. But no one paid any attention to the documents. Only when they found that Zero stranded in the Aleutians did the Americans get to work on the Hellcat.

No not quite that way sir. The Hellcat was in the works well before Pearl Harbor was attacked. It wasn't originally slated to be much more then a modest upgrade. I think after the Zero saw action in China though, the Navy changed their minds about 'modest.'

Sheo Darren wrote:Even so, there were Japanese officers who tried preventing the Emperor and pro-peace officers from surrendering, to the point that they tried kidnapping the Emperor. There were fatalities, as I remember. A nasty business.

I was reading about that on wikipedia just the other day actually. The failed coup seemed fairly bloodless, considering they attempted to take the Imperial Palace.

Sheo Darren wrote:The F-15 Eagle is of course the premier 4th generation fighter of the world. No fighter has yet to beat it in real combat. It helps that the Israelis who established that record are the best pilots in the world, bar none. I understand that even the USAF pilots would lose to the IAF mano y mano. That is, until the F-22s appear.

USAF F-15's have also scored air to air kills in various combat operations. So Israel alone is not responsible for the F-15's superb statistics. It also helps the F-15 hasn't exactly seen many fair fights. The IAF is certainly a bad ass group, just like the other Israeli military branches. Israel deals with war in a much more real sense then the US. So pound for pound the entire Israeli military is probably better then the US military. It's much smaller though, so the US still comes out as top dog.

Sheo Darren wrote:The F-22 outclasses the F-15. In one exercise, an F-22 flew straight at an F-15. The F-15's radar couldn't see the F-22.

The F-22 changes a lot of rules. In super awesome ways.

Sheo Darren wrote:The F-35 is the dedicated attack fighter, replacing the F-14 and the earlier F/A-18s. Its GAU-13 cannon has more ammo than the F-22 and is descended from the A-10's GAU-12, since the F-35 will take over the Warthog's mission post 2040.

Wait, what! Okay, the F-35 does have a derivative of the GAU-12. Of course it's designated the GAU-22/A. Key difference being it has one less barrel. That, and the F-35 only carries 180 internally, with the option for another 220 externally, to the F-22 480 internal. I would also like to point out the GAU-12 != the GAU-8. The F-35 is not the A-10, and to replace the latter with the former is a mistake in my mind. The A-10 needs a proper replacement, not some fighter pretending to do it's job. Also that replacement is currently scheduled for about 2028.

Sheo Darren wrote:The SDB has the punch of a much bigger bomb thanks to new explosives, plus much better accuracy. Coupled with its small size, it can be used in urban areas with supposedly little risk of collateral damage.

Okay looking more carefully I realize that your aren't saying the SDB has the punch of a 2000lb JADM. Still something you have to realize is that the SDB is not about a big blast radius. Rather the opposite. Until the SDM the smallest precision weapon in the USAF arsenal was a 500lb bomb. When your doing close air support for the Army in Baghdad, it's not really cool to drop a 500lb on one house in in a neighborhood. That 500lb will take out a couple other buildings when it blows. So you use a bomb that weights 250lb, and only a fifth of that is explosive. That bomb still going to do some collateral, but not nearly as much. Also you get carry twice as much. Also it makes a pretty decent bunker buster against say, a hardened aircraft hangar. So the SDB makes a lot of sense for more then just the new stealth fighters.

Sheo Darren wrote:The YF-23 is stealthier than the YF-22, especially in the IR (infrared) spectrum. Sadly, it was also bigger. That posed a problem, since the Air Force would spend so much money on building new hangars for the new fighter. In comparison, the YF-22 was about the size of the F-15, and could use the latter's hangars. Just one of the reasons the -22 won.

My understand was the main reason was that the YF-23 had sacrificed it's maneuverability to get that stealth. In the end though, that's probably not the only reason.

predecessor of the A-10 Thunderbolt II

The Hs 129 can certainly claim the A-10 as it's spiritual successor. So can the A-1, the Il-2, and the P-47 Thunderbolt. The Thunderbolt was a good air to ground attack aircraft. What's more it was designed by the same company. Some of the Thunderbolt did go into the A-10.

Also I am of the opinion that the Dassault Rafale is one sexy beast. I'll be honest I don't even care if it's a bad fighter. It looks like a fighter should. It just looks like it wants to be doing a mach 2 barrel roll while firing off a missile when it's sitting on the ground.

The more I look at the F-35, the more I like it. Sure it's not as flash as it's older brother the Raptor, but it's still going to be a damn good plane. Too bad Goose will never be able to fly in one.

Mostly because he isn't real he died tragically during training, but also because F-35's don't have RIOs.

Wileama wrote:It just looks like it wants to be doing a mach 2 barrel roll while firing off a missile when it's sitting on the ground.

Barrel rolls - the solution to everything.

Nachtsider wrote:

Wileama wrote:It just looks like it wants to be doing a mach 2 barrel roll while firing off a missile when it's sitting on the ground.

Barrel rolls - the solution to everything.

Nope. As Maverick from Top Gun has showed us, the best thing to do in a dogfight is to hit your brakes and SLOW DOWN. *rolls eyes* Cause you know...speed isn't an advantage...

a Mustangs a P-51 not a P-50

Oh. Good point.

I can rattle off generally accurate data, but I suck at the specific data, especially numbers, and I forget stuff. Gomen gomen. ^_^

Barrel rolls - the solution to everything.

In the 1941 video game, it is! )

Nope. As Maverick from Top Gun has showed us, the best thing to do in a dogfight is to hit your brakes and SLOW DOWN. *rolls eyes* Cause you know...speed isn't an advantage...

Semi-suicidal Marine Harrier pilots and Dale Brown will attest to that. It helps when your plane has a tail gun. Like the B-52 until recently. Or most Soviet/Russian bombers. Open flaps and drop your landing gear, folks!


On a semi-related note, my bro and I play the IAF video game dating back to 1998. It is the only fighter simulator we play. Yet I will forward it as the most punishing, gritty and awesome fighter jet simulator ever made, beating out Ace Combat.

Sure, no giant super laser here.

But...

Try dropping dumb iron bombs on a bunker through a storm of SA-6 missiles and Shilka fire with a Mirage F1. Or turn into that pesky MiG-21 and hose him with your cannon. Or, my personal favorite, sink gunboats with a salvo of Zunni rockets.

I want a sequel.

How about you guys? What fighter sim do you like>

Fighter eh?

Hmmm....

I'd have to say Crimson skies.
its more of a fictual fighter sim with a story line.

going for Factional though, I'd say IL-2 Just love the Lockheed P38L White Lightning

Whatever the Japanese said to new recruits about American Marines' first mission being to kill their parents (with about ten times the stigma attached if the Marine in question was black; I seem to remember hints of cannibalism were overly implied, but I may be wrong), they knew that the Russians were much, much worse..

I can confirm that.

Aside from being told that we're superior and that the bushido code will clear any foes against us, my grandfather told me when he was a recruit that if the Americans won the war, they will go inland, rape your mother and children, kill your family.

Near the end of the war, it changed. He asked a new recruit back then if the Americans win the war, they'll do just the same. But if the Russians captured Japan, they'll do the same and send you to their work camps or their gulags.

Well, the Americans won, and they didn't do that...except some who did went to Japan. No offense, but I see they did left some of their culture here...

(dig this) encouraged acts of cannibalism against captured enemy
troops. No, I'm not kidding about that last point.

Who told you that? My grandfather never heard such thing. Atrocities? Well...have to admit there are...some. Not gonna' mention them, but I say 'Manchuria' is enough.

Still, no one can match that Stuka pilot who sank a Russkie battleship with his cannon. ^_^

Can't compare Russian battleships with British or American battleship. They lost against us in 1904-1905.

Technological wise, we did exchanged some stuff with the Germans. That's what I read, but I can't confirm that. I think it got intercepted by the Americans or the Chinese...

We got our hands on German prototype Natter Rocket Plane and developed something similar to use as Kamikaze bombs--but never had the chance to do so. I still think the Atomic bomb is something unnecessary--both of them. The Russians are enough.

On aircraft, I like the BF109, FW190, and personally, the ME262. The 262 has the coolest design (despite its early failures and all) and is a powerful bird fitted with four or five cannons on the nose. The P-51 can outclass it with its maneuverability, but damn that thing is fast for the time! The Gloster Meteor Mk. II is nothing compared to the ME262. Too bad Hitler was stupid to put it as a bomber--its potential as an interceptor and fighter is partially realized. Good technology in the wrong hands.

How about you guys? What fighter sim do you like>

Secret Weapons Over Normandy, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Blazing Angels: Squadrons of World War II, Heroes of the Pacific... yeah, definitely WW2 air simulaiton game. I'd like a taste flying the A6M2 our Imperial Navy have. In Secret Weapons Over Normandy, the Zero--which is supposed to be a 'trophy'--is one plane that I upgrade without hesitation. Love the maneuverability!

Panzer IV wrote:Who told you that? My grandfather never heard such thing.

The Tokyo War Crimes Trials - I read the reports. Most infamous instance occured in the Bonins. Chichi Jima, I think.

Who told you that? My grandfather never heard such thing. Atrocities?
Well...have to admit there are...some. Not gonna' mention them, but I
say 'Manchuria' is enough.

Well, if your grandfather was just a recruit or in the "civil defense" unit, it's doubtful he would have heard. The Japanese military were good at hiding stuff from the rank and file.

I know there were experiments with bubonic plague and influenza in Manchuria. Sparked a short story in the Hellblazer
comics about the ghost/corpse of a masochistic WWII torturer who didn't want
to "go into the light" without first tasting what he inflicted on
others (the entire Marquis de Sade "can't have pleasure without the
pain"). That was a creepy story in a creepy comic book series.

There's also the Bataan Death March. Then that psychopathic fucker
Iwabuchi and his diehard Naval Infantrymen digging into Intramuros and
Manila, going against Yamamoto's orders to retreat into the mountains.

We're lucky McArthur- God bless that arrogant ass; yes, I'm badmouthing
The Liberator because he is indeed the martinet of all martinets-
didn't call in airstrikes. He just made do with tube artillery and
tanks to pound Intramuros into the crumbling shambles tourists visit today. Typical Americans. Their first reaction to an obstacle is high explosives. That's why I fucking love them. If violence doesn't work, you're not using enough of it.

I mean, before the War, Manila was the Pearl of the Orient. The city, or at least a large part of it, was designed by a Frenchman, which is why some sources described it to be the Asian Paris. After the war, it was so much smoking rubble.

And we got "cheated" out of billions of dollars worth of surplus war material we could have used to rebuild. Goddamn American Congress. They took months to agree to it- with a catch. We had to have a receipt for anything and everything worth over $10. By the time the bean counters were warming up, all that good steel rusted to ferric hell.

Congress' dicking around lost the Vietnam War. When you attack someone, you don't slap 'em first with a sissy lacy glove. You hit them like the balled fist of an angry pagan God. You don't tell your pilots not to attack airfields and SAM sites until they're fully constructed. You bring in carrier divisions and heavy bomber wings to pound the stuffing out of anything remotely threatening, drop two airborne divisions into Ho Chi Minh City, storm Haiphong Harbor with Marines under fire support from USS Newport News, and airmobile all across the map to outmaneuver the opposition.

It's okay for the fucking French to dilly-dally at Dien Bien Phu because they're the fucking French, who haven't won a war against anyone in ages except fellow French, invalids, women, children and Roman legionnaires in marching columns- but hell, anyone could kill Roman legionnaires in marching columns.

Ah, well. This is why I can't be a diplomat in real life. I sound too much like some sarcastic ultranationalist redneck warmonger come straight out of a Tom Clancy or Clive Cussler story. I believe too much in "Words do not kick ass. My foot does." If I ever get on a roll, entire cities will burn to establish a point. -_-

As a footnote to this outrage, there's the Rape of Nanking. The sight of babies being hurled onto bayonets chills me.

On a side note, if anyone is curious, look up the Balangiga Massacre in Wiki. This is why you don't piss off Malays. We're the nicest folk around until you slap us in the face- or until one of us starts singing Sinatra's My Way. Then people tend to start dying horribly by rusty metal implements.

Chill senpai...

But yeah, my grandfather is part of the civil defense unit. A corporal by the end of the war. All he has to do is herd women and children into bunkers, talk, take shelter, etc. He thinks the Americans were cowards for using the A-bomb; still, he thinks the Russian would do worse.

But yeah, those atrocities...

I actually just knew about them a year ago. My grandfather never knew about it and there's none in the textbooks or in the library.

Yeah, Sheo, your not fit for diplomacy, Your better as an assassin like me

"Guns dont kill people, People Kill people Using Guns."
"If you don't agree, than you're dead."
"It's my way, or the high way to heaven."
"Another day, another corpse. Thats life for you."

or my personal favorite.

"War is not about dying for your country. Its about making that son of a bitch on the other side to die for his."

Panzer IV wrote:I actually just knew about them a year ago. My grandfather never knew about it and there's none in the textbooks or in the library.

Now, I'm not normally prone to cursing. But that's just fucked up.

I've heard how my government used to altered or cover historical stuff and--as a history student--I do see this as a great limitation.

Well, I have to say that it is fucked up. No wonder China kept on demanding something and the Koreans have some thing against us...well, I can't agree less on that now

Man Sheo, I have to say you've got me heated. You insult my French heritage, not to mention drag the American military, and government over the coals. I'll give you that while I don't know if the US government was euro-centric in their reconstruction efforts, it wouldn't surprise me if it was. As to the destruction of cities, I'm all for proportionality, and all that Law of Armed Combat. I'm sorry though, it's fucking war man. Did you see what happened to European cities? When fighting took place in them they weren't always left with a lot of structurally sound buildings. Also think, was a squadron of B-29 dropping hundreds of unguided gravity bombs really better then tanks or artillery? I'm sure the Japanese would like to argue that one. City fighting isn't terribly clean, and I'm sorry that Asia suffered as a result. Honestly though, buildings can be rebuilt much easier the human beings can. I would trade an artillery shell, and a building with enemies for a soldiers life any day.

America made mistakes with Vietnam, it's true. Of course when you consider that invading the North might have been dragging Russian, or China into the war, I can't fault them for being too cautious. That, and while the French might not have the best military record of any nation, there are limits to which my pride will allow you to mock that.

Ok, guys, a suggestion here.

Lets keep the bashing of once nationality and heritage at bay.
as far as I can see, Sheo is just Blowing off a bit of steam, from something that runs extremely deep.

I mean, Germany is still very prone to being pissed off, as soon as you mention anything that has to do with the former Nazi Germany and Hitlers reign. I admit, I have a German heritage, and even I get pissed off about it.

but I try not to take it personal, Unless the words being said about the matter become way to personal towards me.

Though I hate Diplomacy, Lets keep it a bit more diplomatic, Is my suggestion.

Gomen, Wileama-san. I got out of hand and was seriously in the wrong, letting my being hothead when it comes to refighting wars for the millionth time over the Internet get the better of me. I apologize duly and sincerely.

It's not that I hate the French. It's just that I find it ridiculous that, generally, they seem to lose each and every single war they fight, even when they're supposed to have the advantage. Dien Bien Phu was a sad mishandling of the situation- but in the light of other historical military debacles, foremost of which comes to mind is the Teutonenberg Disaster, I realize that it's nothing new. Humans are fallible. We mess up.

And yes, I'm a big one to talk considering my personal opinion of nuking the opposing side until they glow doesn't always take into consideration the fact that the OpFor might be just as capable of atomizing me. Yeah, invading the North would have brought the Chinese and Soviets in, and that would have been pretty much the start of World War Three. And considering the state of the US Army from then up to 1987 or so (when the increased funding finally made a difference, or so I am led to believe), I guess we'd have all learned either Chinese or Russian.

But I'm babbling. And this from a guy who belongs to a race who, until the Spanish taught us the hard way, couldn't fight beans.

When Filipino Malays fight, it's like this. A barangay - kind of like a self-sufficient territory - sends its elites and "slaves" (who are basically guys who owe money to richer folk, not really the property of their "owners") to another barangay's territory via rowboat.

The slaves do the fighting. Guess who does the rowing? Yep, the rich elite do the rowing. There's no shirking manual labor for all involved.

And the fighting? From what I understand, it's more like exchanging javelins from behind wooden shields while both sides raise a ruckus and try to psyche out the OpFor with war cries and hullabaloo. No fancy swordwork. Rarely do either force close in. Few, if any, warriors get killed, mostly by not huddling enough behind their shields.

The battle ends if one side decides to quit, which happens quickly enough. The victorious side does not pursue. (No charging the rear of routing hoplites, historically the part where the Greeks inflicted the most damage on their foes.)

The winners even bury the other side's corpses, or give them back to their owners, though for a fee. It's considered very bad form if you hold a body hostage. The corpse is considered to have a high chance of turning into a local undead monster. Malay supernatural monsters make European monsters look like actors in stuffed costumes and makeup.

Course, there are nasty incidents. The mountain tribes have a history of killing everyone they run across and taking ears or heads. They're real headhunters, who use arrowheads that get stuck in your body and do horrendous internal damage.

There's even a story involving one of our national heroes, Andres Bonifacio. He and a group of his buddies got captured by Igorot mountain tribesmen. The Igorot killed all of Bonifacio's companions.

But... they let Bonifacio live.

The reason?

Bonifacio was good-looking.

I can't quite believe myself that his looks saved him. Oh, well. Maybe the girl members of this forum can confirm it for me?


Again, Wileama-san, my apologies for being an idiot who lets his mouth run off.

I'm sorry though, it's fucking war man. Did you see what happened to European cities

Well, in a situation of war, can't argue about it. Civilians usually sustain the largest casualties--they are the casualties of war.

A war in a city is costly, street by street gunfight with risks of booby traps, collapsing building, tanks, and ambushes--its hell itself. But still, the A-bomb? That's hell to the victim! Ever seen how clothes melt into your body and sticks? How chopsticks pierced through your gums due to shock? Or break your teeth when the shock hits? These were horrible stories after the dropping of the A-Bomb on Hiroshima.

...then Russia invented the Tsar Bomba which have a larger blast than the nuke in 1945. If that thing is ever fielded...I don't want to imagine what happen.


On the French, no offense meant, but in terms of technology and all they were amongst the best compare to the Germans during the 1st AND the 2nd world war.

What brought them down most of the time is how they often underestimated their foe--just how Nazi Germany do after their 2-3 year conquest. The French during the 1st World War fielded one of the most modern-like tank; was it the Somua? I don't remember but out of all WW1 tanks its the only one that has a fully rotatetable 360 degrees turret.

During the Second World War, they have this Super Heavy Tank that was never fielded (afraid of being destroyed or lost), and the Char B1 Bis which fields two guns--that wins over German Panzer I, Panzer IIs, and Panzer IIIs as well as the early Panzer IVs.

Then in Vietnam, they underestimated the Viet Minh of their capabilities and their power as a force--Dien Bien Phu taught them something. The French is a powerful diplomatic nation and, to be honest, if they were less arrogant so to say they could stop the Germans during Fall Gelb. Its the same as how we, the Japanese, underestimated the Americans during the War that led us to our defeat...uugh I hate mentioning it over and over.

Hey, Rise of Nations and those 'historical wise' video games were quite accurate sometimes; I love using the French for its simplicity, yet the Germans for its fire-power.

It's a sad fact that the French definitely had the equipment to rival Germany's in 1940 (the Char B1 bis tank and Dewoitine fighter plane being good examples) but underestimated their opponent and committed their forces in a fashion that was totally inadequate to counter the Blitzkrieg tactics. But the Free French forces who battled alongside the Allies to retake Europe fought like lions, and so did the French Resistance. Without their help, achieving victory would have been so much tougher.

Apology accepted. Honestly I never thought you hated the French. It wounds my pride to say it, but with the rare exception, Frances military record sucks. [It is nuclear now though, and I pretty sure Paris will be reduced to cinders before it is allowed to fall again] I can't blame people for wanting to joke about that. I often criticize the American government, and the US military. I can't really blame others for wanting to do the same, even if I have a different opinion on the particular matter. It is only the manner in which you spoke that upset me. You to where upset though, and up said some things without thinking about it. I know I've done the same thing, and doubtless will do it again. The Arabs have a saying though, 'turn you tongue seven times before speaking.' I do my best to follow it, but as you said: humans are fallible. We mess up. I wouldn't be surprised if in a day, or two I say something stupid that gets people worked up myself. So really don't worry about it.

Anyway to get back on topic, I love Ace Combat 6. I don't play fighter sims much. The only other one I've really played was Crimson Skies, and that didn't really do much for me. I'm sure I could get into a more complicated, and realistic sim. To be honest though, I love being super awesome. Shooting down hundreds of airplanes, blowing god know how many armor vehicles up, and most of all saving the day single handedly. I didn't care much for the story, but that's not why I play it. I played it so I could say, "Well hit the brakes, and he'll go right past us!"

P.S. Okay normally in a dogfight you want to stay fast. Speed gives you options in maneuvering that without, you don't have. On occasion though suddenly slowing down, can be helpful. [like this case]

I favor speed over agility, myself. It sounds cliched, but in aerial combat, 'speed is life' more often than not. Studies have indicated that pilot skill can compensate for lack of maneuverability.

Nachtsider wrote:I favor speed over agility, myself. It sounds cliched, but in aerial combat, 'speed is life' more often than not. Studies have indicated that pilot skill can compensate for lack of maneuverability.

As one who knows a little bit about airial combat, i can confirm that one.
My nefue is actually a F16 fighter pilot. and he told me a few things, so.

Wileama wrote:Anyway to get back on topic, I love Ace Combat 6.

Ace Combat games kick ass. I'm really looking foward to Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X. game. It's suppose to be similar to Ace Combat and really good.

Nachtsider wrote:It sounds cliched, but in aerial combat, 'speed is life' more often than not.

Right, which is why I joked about Maverick doing his "hitting the brakes" maneuver. If an enemy jet was already on my six and locked, I certainly wouldn't slow down, and lift the nose. That's asking to get your ass blasted off. Especially when flying a big target like an F-14.

My big problem with Ace Combat 6, is I didn't buy the limited edition. Which seems a huge mistake given just how much fun it is. I seriously need a proper joystick, and throttle, maybe even yaw pedals for my next combat sim. H.A.W.X. looks interesting, I've enjoyed ghost recon so we'll see how this one turns out.

About speed. Yes 'speed is life' is a motto to live by in aerial combat. In Top Gun Maverick is in the middle of full blow brawl with several fighters when he decides to shed a lot of his air speed. I agree that is not a smart time to use such a maneuver. My point is that, like so many other rules in life, there are exceptions to this rule. Take the fight I linked between the F-4, and the MIG-17. It's a 1v1, so there will likely be time to build energy up before facing another opponent. What's more is the F-4 is dealing with a highly competent opponent pilot. The pilot made a risky move that allowed him to win, by playing to his opponents expectations. The enemy pilot didn't expect his opponent to risk giving up airspeed, and risk stalling, to get on his tail. Since they where fighting in the vertical, the MIG-17 didn't have much speed itself by the time the Phantom was behind it. There were probably other ways the F-4 could have won. That doesn't mean that in this case what the F-4 pulled was was stupid.

I favor speed over agility, myself

Agility wins over speed. I prefer agility more

...actually, combine both and that's a fighter I'd take.

The P-51D Mustang could won against Germany's ME-262 because of its agility. Its capability to turn and counter the 262 head on knocks them down like flies

Classic Japanese fighter pilot, is Panzer IV.

Wileama wrote:The F-4 video

I laughed a little at the phrase "If he had guns..."

The F-4 being a design from a period when some thought that guns were obsolete in a dogfight.

Doesn't the Phantom have a Gatling in the nose?

Originally the F-4 did not have an internal cannon. That was corrected on later variants once it was realised that a gun was still a useful feature on fighters at the time. I believe some of the earlier variants ended up carrying gun pods to make up for the lack of an internal cannon, didn't they?

yeah thats right, only they didn't work to well as the mounts tended to bend under high g loads and throw the aim way off !

The gunpods didn't work well, because the mounts would flex from the force of the gun firing. They also where easy to misalign, lacked a radar guided gun sight, and early models didn't work at certain air speeds. The F-4E corrected this by adding the gun. The USAF, and Navy Aviation was stupid dumb for thinking fighters didn't need guns anymore. Some even thought missiles made the dogfight dead. A little taste of the reality war woke them up. This is why the F-22 has a gun.

Hi, guys. I'm back for the moment.

Thanks for forgiving me, Wileama-san. I won't mess up again. Especially since I now know that Karma is spelled "TONSILITIS AND ACUTE BRONCHITIS AT THE SAME TIME". I was downed faster and more thoroughly than an American daylight bomber in the first years of the Combined Bomber Offensive. Which is why you guys haven't been (dis)graced by my presence for the best part of this week.

I'll be back soon enough. Ja ne.

Get well soon, Sheo. Goodness knows we need more of you hereabouts.

That's awful man, hope you get better! Again, don't worry about what you said, it's already forgotten.

On a slightly more related note it turns out: Birds are Bad

On a slightly more related note it turns out: Birds are Bad

about how they always get sucked into the jets' exhaust and burn the entire engine out?

Well, they didn't experience that when using prop-planes! :p

So they're not THAT bad...
they're just...a mistake.

Don't be so sure, Panzer. There were many occasions on which birds flew into a prop-plane's spinning airscrews, got themselves chopped to bits, and damaged the propellers.

An air craft can be damaged by a bird. That was an extreme example, very rarely do they take the entire aircraft down. Even in piston drive prop aircraft thought they can cause damage. As Nachtsider pointed out they can damage the prop. That, and they can do this. [Be warned there is some blood, and gore. Especially in photo #2]

Poor bald eagle. Look at it. Staring at you with that "Hey we were up here first" look.

the one of the jets is footage of 2 different planes,the F-16 landed safely,it was the BAE hawk trainer that crashed

That eagle crashed through the propeller or the windshield? How did it get inside the C-130?

I remember reading about a vintage WW2 aircraft going down because of abird back in late 90's. Can't recall the specific model [A20?], but it was a twin engine. One of the engines had failed and as it was circling the airfield it suddenly lost power in 2cd engine and crashed. Crash investigators found evidence that remaing engine had struck a bird and failed. Article never said why other engine was down.

The other engine needn't have failed as well for the plane to have gone down. Limping back home on one engine isn't as easy as fiction makes it to be. If it did, in fact, fail as well, perhaps it failed from the strain of having to propel the plane on its own.

Panzer IV wrote:That eagle crashed through the propeller or the windshield? How did it get inside the C-130?

one of the many extra windows on the plane's front end:

-that one.

I'm back. And more or less hale.

Ah, yes. FOD. Foreign Object Damage. Even a pencil will reduce a multimillion-dollar jet engine to scrap if it goes in the wrong way.

The bird doesn't even have to enter the engine, from what I understand. Just hitting the cowling- the metal "lip" around the engine's "mouth"- will do a lot of damage.

Poor bald eagle. Look at it. Staring at you with that "Hey we were up here first" look.

To which I counter, cruelly so, by clumsily paraphrasing Dennis Leary: "What gives us the right to kill these animals at will? I'll tell you what. Guns. Big fucking guns with giant fucking bullets in them."

lol

you really got to watch this F-15 clip !

http://www.sonnyradio.com:80/F15.wmv



:poor-etta:

-that one.

Ouch...

and got itself ripped to shreds due to the speed...

poor eagle.


...then again, why would the C-130 need that many extra windows?

Humans, being sight oriented beings like to be able to look at things. In an aircraft it's important to not only be able see whats in front, above, and below you. That particular window happens to be by the pilots foot, allowing him to look down at things like say: a runway, or another plane/bird that could be in his way. That particular C-130 looks to be an AC-130 Gunship, so it also has a big screen to allow the pilot to look down, and to his left where the guns while be hitting.

While I do feel sorry for the eagle, it's an animal. I'm much happier that the 'debris' did hit the man in the leg, and shatter his leg like so much glass. I also feel really bad for the crew chief that got stuck cleaning that up. I've had to deal with one or two bird strikes, but nothing that bad.